Nucleic Acids Research, 1994, Vol. 22, No. 16 3373-3380
© 1994
MOLECULAR BIOLOGY |
Nucleic acid sequences coding for internal antisense peptides: are there implications for protein folding and evolution?
Department of Biology, Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, OH 44106 1Computer Research and Technology, National Institutes of Health Bethesda, MD 20892 2institute for Computational Science and Informatics, George Mason University Fairfax, VA 22030, USA
*To whom correspondence should be addressed
Received May 16, 1994. Revised July 25, 1994. Accepted July 25, 1994.
We have asked whether coding segments of nucleic acids generate amino acid sequences which have an antisense relationship to other amino acid sequences in the same chain (i.e. ‘Internal Antisense’), and if so, could the internal antisense content be related to the structure of the encoded protein? Computer searches were conducted with the coding sequences for 132 proteins. The result for each search of a specific sequence was compared to the mean result obtained from 1000 randomly assembled nucleic acid chains whose length and base composition were identical to that of the native sequences. The study was conducted in all three reading frames. The normal reading frame (frame one) was found to be contain lower amounts of internal antisense than the randomly assembled chains, whereas the frame two results were much higher. The internal antisense content in frame three was not significantly different from that in the random chains. The amount of internal antisense in frames two and three was correlated with the GC content at the center position of the codons in that frame, but this correlation was absent in frame one. No correlation with chain length was found. Qualitatively similar results were obtained when the random model was limited to retain the same purine/pyrimidine ratio as the native chains at each position in the codons, but in this case the internal antisense in frame three was also significantly greater than the computer-generated sequences. Theresults suggest that the internal antisense content in the correct reading frame has a qualitatively different origin from that in the other two frames. The high amount in frames two and three is apparently an artifact resulting from the asymmetric distribution of G and C in the codons, while the low amount in frame one may suggest evolutionary selection against internal antisense. Thus, the results do not support a relationship between internal antisense and protein structure.